Hi Paul,

What you are advocating sounds to me much like decolonisation, and wherever it has happened the economic outcome has often been disastrous. Fiscal prudence, education, infrastructure, and eliminating corruption might not sound exciting to you, but they play a crucial role in improving living standards.

Unlike CM, I think everyone's contribution here is valuable, but that value depends on whether you choose to rail against others or find opportunity to learn about the world.

Hi Trumpster,

"He (Paul) doesn't dispute that what I (Trumpster) said about the ALP trying to divide society for electoral gain is true, but just claims, without evidence, that the other side does it too."

I do dispute that claim, the Big Two political parties are moderate centralist parties, looking to garner support from the mass middle ground. If you were to apply that to radicals like One Nation I would agree.

I'm not sure what the Noalition want in giving preferences in the Farrer by-election to One Nation, over a popular independent (there's no Labor candidate). They look to me like the conservatives in pre-war Germany trying to butter up the Nazi's, see where thast got them, a firing squad.

Fester

I'm amazed that a sensible person like you keeps feeding the nasty troll.

Hi Fester,

There should not be unrealistic scapegoating, and those things you mentioned, fiscal prudence, education, infrastructure, and eliminating corruption are very important in a well balanced society. What is questioned by younger people is fairness, the system whereby they carry the heavy burden of providing for the older generation and themselves today. A system that gives some very liberal benefits through taxation and welfare to others, who have already accumulated considerable wealth. Many believe they will never receive the same consideration in the future, nor will they have the same opportunities that people in the past have enjoyed.

Hi ttbn,

You call anyone who doesn't agree with your world view a troll, so be it.

ttbn,

It's all about perspective. Paul poses an interesting question, and if everyone were to agree, how pointless this place would be. As I said before, it is what you might learn on olo that makes it of value. Engaging in attacks on others demonstrates that people are missing the point.

Hi Paul,

"Many believe they will never receive the same consideration in the future, nor will they have the same opportunities that people in the past have enjoyed."

Maybe, but going after the wealthy tends to destroy economies rather than build them. Singapore is a shining example of the benefits of eliminating corruption and investing in education and infrastructure. Russia is a shining example of how to destroy a nation with bad decisions and corruption. Russia should be the wealthiest nation on earth instead of a pariah.

https://youtu.be/Jvvdz8Q3Q_k?si=58hqL5GHPm-qvcHC

Hi Fester,

I don't think its a case of going after the wealthy as such, the wealthy do very well from our system, Harry Triguboff Australia's second richest person is in the housing market, good for Harry. Rightly there is a focus on housing, but its not only housing, oddly home ownership is a desired value in Australian society, more so than in many other western countries, Europe for instance, so it is being given a lot of attention. What young people believe, and I think they are predominantly correct, is there is an uneven playing field when it comes to government largesse, a bias in favour of those in society who are already relatively well off. Government recognises that imbalance, and they want to address it in some small way. Can we agree on that?